Things you consider academic dishonesty , but people do all the time?

[ideasrule]

Is Adderall really that prevalent nowadays? I'm in my 30s, so I'm somewhat removed socially from most current undergrads. When I was an undergrad, I didn't know anyone who used Adderall...

Yes, it's definitely very prevalent in both high school and college. I don't use Adderall, but I also don't look down to those who do; after all, it's no more fair for some people to be naturally talented than it is for their competitors to gain an advantage with Adderall.

 

[ideasrule]

Hold on, here. That's some serious overkill depending on the situation.

For example, you might use Fast Fourier Transforms over and over in Matlab codes where the object of the program you're writing is something completely different than showing whether or not you can write a Fast Fourier Transform.

So, if you wrote code for a Fast Fourier Transform, would you have to rewrite it from scratch in every program you used it in?

Or could you copy code that you'd written previously for a different program that used FFTs?

Could you just copy the code from your textbook as long as you typed it into your program yourself?

Could you download what is a very common slice of code from the Internet?

Or could you just use the built in Fast Fourier Transform function that someone else wrote and included in the Matlab software?

If writing a program in C++, could you use the square root function built into the C++ language? The function that some other programmer wrote? Or would you have to write your own segment of code that takes square roots?

Just by using a language's built-in functions instead of designing and coding each function yourself, you're using someone else's code.

Out of those examples, only 2 are even remotely related to "copying code from the Internet or from other students":

Could you just copy the code from your textbook as long as you typed it into your program yourself?

Could you download what is a very common slice of code from the Internet?

The answer is no, unless proper attribution is included. I highly doubt KingNothing was saying that including code is dishonest even with attribution, since that's an absurd position to take.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Yes, it's definitely very prevalent in both American high school and college. I don't use Adderall, but I also don't look down to those who do; after all, it's no more fair for some people to be naturally talented than it is for their competitors to gain an advantage with Adderall.

The bold there is a little caveat I feel you need to add. I can't speak for all of us on the forum not from the states but here in the UK drug use for studies is very rare, probably due to the far less prevalence of prescription drugs.

 

[JaredJames]

The bold there is a little caveat I feel you need to add. I can't speak for all of us on the forum not from the states but here in the UK drug use for studies is very rare, probably due to the far less prevalence of prescription drugs.

Seconded. I've never heard of it.

 

[Haldhad]

There are many people who feel it is unfair to give certain students more time on tests, even if they do have some sort of mental disability.

Why?

 

[ideasrule]

Why?

I know this isn't addressed to me, but a test should measure the student's understanding of the course material. Period. If the student has a disability that affects his learning, that's unfortunate, but the test must remain an accurate measurement instead of being a random number generator.

Now, if the student has a disability that specifically prevents him from taking an exam, that's a different story. He might understand the material perfectly; he just has trouble demonstrating it in an exam setting. In that case, it's possible to accommodate him without compromising the accuracy of the test.

 

[HeLiXe]

Teacher's fault, not student's. The teacher should never have let him have at his test again after leaving the room for so long.

I understand your point about the teacher not giving the test back to the student, but I don't think the teacher should be faulted for the student's dishonesty. I think she was acting in good faith as the question needed clarification and he missed it.

I guess he went to the restroom. If you leave the room and give your test to the professor, it means it's game over for you, you finished it. If you went to the restroom you can still come back.

He was finished and gave it to the teacher. She gave permission for students to leave and come back at a later time for lecture (when testing was over).

 

[tedbradly]

I understand your point about the teacher not giving the test back to the student, but I don't think the teacher should be faulted for the student's dishonesty. I think she was acting in good faith as the question needed clarification and he missed it.

He was finished and gave it to the teacher. She gave permission for students to leave and come back at a later time for lecture (when testing was over).

In my opinion, ambiguous questions are fair game on tests, because the truly knowledgeable will find the discrepancy and ask about it in class, which should be done in private. A teacher should not reveal the error on a test to all, revealing it instead only to the one who asked, (if it affects all evenly) nor give a student who left after the first sighting of that error another chance. He left without asking for clarification. Obviously, he didn't understand the material for having left.

And someone who withholds exposing a cheater is equally guilty of cheating. If the person who spotted this problem feels so bad about it, he should turn him in.

 

[HeLiXe]

In my opinion, ambiguous questions are fair game on tests, because the truly knowledgeable will find the discrepancy and ask about it in class, which should be done in private. A teacher should not reveal the error on a test to all, revealing it instead only to the one who asked, (if it affects all evenly) nor give a student who left after the first sighting of that error another chance. He left without asking for clarification. Obviously, he didn't understand the material for having left.

And someone who withholds exposing a cheater is equally guilty of cheating. If the person who spotted this problem feels so bad about it, he should turn him in.

I understand that this is your opinion, but I really cannot agree with all of your logic.

 

[tedbradly]

I understand that this is your opinion, but I really cannot agree with all of your logic.

Where do you stop agreeing with it? If I were a teacher, I'd never intentionally insert error. But if there is some, why should only one student, the one who found it first, be disadvantaged by wasting his time in asking the question that all else should ask? It is fairest for all to find and ask about the error themselves, offering fairness to the first to ask it. And, sensibly, I would disclose this policy to my students to encourage them to ask about dubious questions.

 

[Pythagorean]

The bold there is a little caveat I feel you need to add. I can't speak for all of us on the forum not from the states but here in the UK drug use for studies is very rare, probably due to the far less prevalence of prescription drugs.

Wait, what? Theres other countries besides the US and Iraq? Huh...

 

[HeLiXe]

Where do you stop agreeing with it? If I were a teacher, I'd never intentionally insert error. But if there is some, why should only one student, the one who found it first, be disadvantaged by wasting his time in asking the question that all else should ask? It is fairest for all to find and ask about the error themselves, offering fairness to the first to ask it. And, sensibly, I would disclose this policy to my students to encourage them to ask about dubious questions.

How does this exclude the responsibility of the student to be honest, and how does this make the teacher at fault for the student's dishonesty? How is the person who asked first disadvantaged if the teacher makes the error known to the class? If the teacher made an error and discloses it to the students, why is that unfair? These are the points in the logic I do not agree with.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

In my opinion, ambiguous questions are fair game on tests, because the truly knowledgeable will find the discrepancy and ask about it in class, which should be done in private. A teacher should not reveal the error on a test to all, revealing it instead only to the one who asked, (if it affects all evenly) nor give a student who left after the first sighting of that error another chance. He left without asking for clarification. Obviously, he didn't understand the material for having left.

And someone who withholds exposing a cheater is equally guilty of cheating. If the person who spotted this problem feels so bad about it, he should turn him in.

I'm afraid I don't agree with this. Students are there to learn from a teacher, if they could go away and learn it all by themselves then they wouldn't need to be taught. Yes students should be able to spot some errors however if a lecturer presents a fact which other things are contingent on and this fact turns out to be wrong it is his fault, not the students for not spotting it.

 

[tedbradly]

How does this exclude the responsibility of the student to be honest, and how does this make the teacher at fault for the student's dishonesty?

Humans are too weak, and to offer such an easy course of debauchery is the teacher's fault, not the student's.

How is the person who asked first disadvantaged if the teacher makes the error known to the class? If the teacher made an error and discloses it to the students, why is that unfair? These are the points in the logic I do not agree with.

Because he alone had to waste test-taking time to ask the question and wait on the response. Further, it also offers a chance that he worked on the problem, wasting time, while another student skipped it. Then, he is the one that wasted time, having discovered the issue (which deserves reward, not penalty) and then the student who coincidentally skipped it (and perhaps may not have even been well-versed enough to spot the error) reaps the benefits relative to the better student who sighted the error.

It is fairest to have each student work through the problem impossibly, discover that impossibility, ask about it, and then correctly finish the problem. Otherwise, coincidence and perhaps even inability reap reward over more watchful students.

I'm afraid I don't agree with this. Students are there to learn from a teacher, if they could go away and learn it all by themselves then they wouldn't need to be taught. Yes students should be able to spot some errors however if a lecturer presents a fact which other things are contingent on and this fact turns out to be wrong it is his fault, not the students for not spotting it.

All you're mentioning is the difference between an A and B student. An A student discovers errors in his professor's teachings (I alone found +20 errors in my teacher's book, which he thanked me for). A B student sits back and does little extra work.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

All you're mentioning is the difference between an A and B student. An A student discovers errors in his professor's teachings (I alone found +20 errors in my teacher's book, which he thanked me for). A B student sits back and does little extra work.

That's not true in every case, there is a massive difference between working out that something a professor said doesn't make sense or looking up the information the professor provided because it was required and fact-checking everything your professor says. For example if your teacher gives you a lecture slide with a transcription pathway map on it intended to supplement your learning on how an endocrine works there is no need to go away and check that everything on that map is true.

Your statement stands only on the subjects that require or are likely to be studied further. It is not practical and unrealistic to expect a student to go and check that everything the professor said is true. There is a world of difference between extra reading/self-study and fact-checking everything that is said.

 

[JaredJames]

Because he alone had to waste test-taking time to ask the question and wait on the response.

What's he waiting for a response on? If he's spotted an error and has to ask anyway if it's correct, then he's losing the time either way. No disadvantage there.

His advantage is that he doesn't have to wait for the teacher to announce it so he gains all of those few seconds over others.

Until the mistake is spotted, all students are wasting time attempting to answer the flawed question, so it's not giving any advantage to others at all by pointing it out.

It is fairest to have each student work through, discover, ask about, and then correctly finish the problem.

So the teacher has to answer each student individually? What if a few find it at the same time? They all then have to wait until he's finished with the previous in order to get to them, at which point they have lost valuable time - more so than in your ridiculous idea above. In fact, the person last to speak to by the teacher may loose significant time, even though they found it at the same point as others.

 

[tedbradly]

What's he waiting for a response on? If he's spotted an error and has to ask anyway if it's correct, then he's losing the time either way. No disadvantage there.

His advantage is that he doesn't have to wait for the teacher to announce it so he gains all of those few seconds over others.

Until the mistake is spotted, all students are wasting time attempting to answer the flawed question, so it's not giving any advantage to others at all by pointing it out.So the teacher has to answer each student individually? What if a few find it at the same time? They all then have to wait until he's finished with the previous in order to get to them, at which point they have lost valuable time - more so than in your ridiculous idea above. In fact, the person last to speak to by the teacher may loose significant time, even though they found it at the same point as others.

Why are you assuming students do the tests in the same order? All students are not necessarily wasting time on the erroneous problem.

And yes, you're right about having to wait, but I'd rather punish people for being slow than punish people for being exceptional.

Plus, if this policy is impractical like you say, then I'll have no questions from test-takers. Instead, they must prove it is flawed, upon which they receive full credit.

 

[JaredJames]

Why are you assuming students do the tests in the same order? All students are not necessarily wasting time on the erroneous problem.

I'm not. But on a test (as with my own) where there are only six questions, the chances are that out of the 30 of us someone is doing the same question at the same time as me. Therefore if we both spot the error together, one will be disadvantaged waiting for a response.

And yes, you're right about having to wait, but I'd rather punish people for being slow than punish people for being exceptional.

Again, you're assuming it's an 'exceptional' student who spots it. Could be a poor student who only knows that one type of question thanks to learning only how to answer that particular style of question.

Plus, if this policy is impractical like you say, then I'll have no questions from test-takers. Instead, they must prove it is flawed, upon which they receive full credit.

You think spotting a mistake should be worth full credit? This argument is getting weaker by the post.

 

[HeLiXe]

(I alone found +20 errors in my teacher's book, which he thanked me for)

Thank you for answering tedbradly. When you found these errors and told the teacher, did you tell him and expect him not to correct them, but to let others find the errors for themselves? If he corrected the errors based on what you told him, do you think that is unfair to you?

 

[tedbradly]

I'm not. But on a test (as with my own) where there are only six questions, the chances are that out of the 30 of us someone is doing the same question at the same time as me. Therefore if we both spot the error together, one will be disadvantaged waiting for a response.Again, you're assuming it's an 'exceptional' student who spots it. Could be a poor student who only knows that one type of question thanks to learning only how to answer that particular style of question.

You're right. Instead of having people question it or having all know about the error after the questioning, the best solution is for the students to reason a question is erroneous (on the test) if it happens to be so. That way, no one is disadvantaged except the weaker students.

Thank you for answering tedbradly. When you found these errors and told the teacher, did you tell him and expect him not to correct them, but to let others find the errors for themselves? If he corrected the errors based on what you told him, do you think that is unfair to you?

He didn't tell other students about the errors during that class, so it was all fair since the curve he established compared student in that class mainly. So no, I felt fine, and I feel fine if he corrected it for later classes since they are not in direct competition with me.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

You're right. Instead of having people question it or having all know about the error after the questioning, the best solution is for the students to reason a question is erroneous if it happens to be so. That way, no one is disadvantaged except the weaker students.

Or the students who came to learn from their teacher

 

[JaredJames]

You're right. Instead of having people question it or having all know about the error after the questioning, the best solution is for the students to reason a question is erroneous if it happens to be so. That way, no one is disadvantaged except the weaker students.

And how much time would it take for a first year class of 100 AE students who all spot the mistake to reason it in front of the teacher individually (wouldn't want them sharing now would we)?

 

[tedbradly]

And how much time would it take for a first year class of 100 AE students who all spot the mistake to reason it in front of the teacher individually (wouldn't want them sharing now would we)?

They reason it on the test as an answer. That is the idea, to remove that wasted time.

Or the students who came to learn from their teacher

Are you seriously saying there is a problem if students who attend class are better off than students who do not attend class? I think that's how it is for most classes...

 

[JaredJames]

He didn't tell other students about the errors during that class, so it was all fair since the curve he established compared student in that class mainly. So no, I felt fine, and I feel fine if he corrected it for later classes since they are not in direct competition with me.

You realize that a teacher making a mistake and teaching it to a class and then not correcting it can mean the difference between life and death in some cases? That it can be the difference between doing a good job and a bad job? A simple mistake in how to apply safety factors that isn't spotted could spell disaster if that student applied them to a real life problem.

 

[JaredJames]

Are you seriously saying there is a problem if students who attend class are better off than students who do not attend class? I think that's how it is for most classes...

What?

Under your rules even if you attend the class you don't get the correction unless you spot it yourself.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

Humans are too weak, and to offer such an easy course of debauchery is the teacher's fault, not the student's.


Because he alone had to waste test-taking time to ask the question and wait on the response. Further, it also offers a chance that he worked on the problem, wasting time, while another student skipped it. Then, he is the one that wasted time, having discovered the issue (which deserves reward, not penalty) and then the student who coincidentally skipped it (and perhaps may not have even been well-versed enough to spot the error) reaps the benefits relative to the better student who sighted the error.

It is fairest to have each student work through the problem impossibly, discover that impossibility, ask about it, and then correctly finish the problem. Otherwise, coincidence and perhaps even inability reap reward over more watchful students.


All you're mentioning is the difference between an A and B student. An A student discovers errors in his professor's teachings (I alone found +20 errors in my teacher's book, which he thanked me for). A B student sits back and does little extra work.

Except we don't base education on a Randian philosophy (which is a very good thing in my books). As a TA I've always found the experience as a struggle to get the requisite knowledge in.. either by hook or by crook. Student A may see a typo and, despite thoroughly knowing the course material, may question their knowledge, assume THEY are wrong rather than a test, person B may know nothing but still assumes they must be right (I'm also the administrator for online assignments they do so I can assure you there's a certain type of person that when they get the wrong answer they ALWAYS assume the question must be wrong (god forbid they get something wrong)). You may not think it but I can virtually guarantee that there were a dozen little points in your life where a teacher gave you the benefit of the doubt (you may never have even been aware of it) which ultimately led to where you are now. Students get things wrong for all kinds of different reasons. Most of which have nothing to do with acumen with the courses material.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

Are you seriously saying there is a problem if students who attend class are better off than students who do not attend class? I think that's how it is for most classes...

I was referring to your idea that "That way, no one is disadvantaged except the weaker students." If students are taught an error by a teacher then they are disadvantaged.

 

[tedbradly]

You realize that a teacher making a mistake and teaching it to a class and then not correcting it can mean the difference between life and death in some cases? That it can be the difference between doing a good job and a bad job? A simple mistake in how to apply safety factors that isn't spotted could spell disaster if that student applied them to a real life problem.

No, it's fine that way, because any decent professor will grade on a curve. Thus, if all miss it, no one is harmed. If only the exceptional student gets it, he is rewarded. Problem solved.

 

[micromass]

I do think that spotting a mistake might be worth a few points. Depending on what mistake.
I remember a test where some students were asked to prove something, but it was actually incorrect. However, constructing a counterexample (or even spotting that it was incorrect) was not trivial at all.
One or two students did manage to come up with a counterexample, and they were rewarded points for the problem. I think that's only fair.

But note, I'm not talking about typo's or trivialities here. I just think that spotting errors and being able to explain why it is an error might be worth some points...

 

[JaredJames]

No, it's fine that way, because any decent professor will grade on a curve. Thus, if all miss it, no one is harmed. If only the exceptional student gets it, he is rewarded. Problem solved.

Right, so you want someone who is exceptional all round but doesn't spot a mistake at some point - and learns the mistake to be the correct method / value - using that mistake in their career? This is nonsense.

"If all miss it" may not mean much on a test, but as above, it could mean all those students end up working with false data in the future, potentially endangering lives. It may sound like an over reaction, but it can happen and is something you should be working to prevent.